Well as you may predict most of it, but you know that.
I note you have left out the sexualisation of our children part of it…presumably a reference to Asian grooming gangs (that dont exist) or r4pe cases and attempted abductions (3 on my doorstep alone that were actually publicised, god knows how many that were hushed up) allegedlly carried out by the freeloaders …sorry the diverse genuine asylum seekers and potential assets to our country who are doctors.
Edit…Just noticed the sexualisation of children bit was not left off your list after all
…unless you edited it of course.
Or more likely because I am too used to skimming through your long winded political posts.
Still, fair play to you,.at least you have looked at and took in (and copied out ) what I wanted you and everybody else to listen to.
Very courteous, thank you, but I already knew that, I’m not in need of validation
It’s unlikely but not impossible: However, like Farage he’s only comfortable mouthing off to his echo chamber for his own narcissistic validation, both knowing that they aren’t going to cut it in the mainstream of having an effect on real politics. The auto censor won’t let me use my word of choice to describe both Robinson and Farage, but it’s an easy anagram of gob heist.
Sadly, “personality” has become all-prevalent in discussions of politics these days, not trying to pick on @cooper1203 but as a random example of someone who posts about politics, it’s all about Boris, Blair, Sunak, Starmer, not about the overall party. Same in the US, look at the Cult of Trump, even if Trump is convicted, he will cry foul, and people in the US will validate him - no doubt including his stauch fawning lackey, Farage.
Putting all of that aside - if that is even remotely possible in this day and age - do some parts of Robinson’s waffle strike a chord with me? Yes.
I’m not opposed to someone sensible and electable tackling some of the issues he threw into his Youtube polemic, but the fact that this person said it (a man of questionable character), and in the manner in which it was said (whipping up support for his “meet”), and the mode of it’s delivery, (social medial post rant), means it is worthy of being ignored.
There are other people better suited to influencing the issues of society: eg Robinson made a point of “the Trans issue”, JK Rowling does it better and with more influence.
Robinson speaks of “children being slaves in a country with a thousand years of Christian history wiped out in a generation”… Well, he loses me immediately when he starts talking about religion, and he sounds like he’s trying to whip up support for, or from, those vigilante “■■■■■■■■■■ hunter” groups, rather than trying to create a situation where police and their side-kicks in complicity, Social Services, are held to account.
Robinson is just “the shouty man down the pub”. So, emphatically no, I’m not going to take him seriously.
However, we live in a democracy so he is legally entitled to be that “shouty man”. I can live with it but people like him are not going to influence me. As is often attributed to Voltaire “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”, that’s the essence of democracy, but I don’t trust Robinson, Farage, Johnson et al to agree with that sentiment.
Ok…
I was about to say again ‘That is your opinion and you are entitled to it’
But I’ll resist, if only to avoid the initial (and needless) sarcastic prickly response to it again.
There’s plenty of gob heists on Youtube, of course people are going to choose who they listen to depending on their selection criteria. Right now I’m choosing to listen to The Arctic Monkeys, if Alex Turner offered me free tickets to a gig I’d say “Can I have two please?”. Mr Robinson’s invitation and his known history, means he qualifies for the:
Darling fascist bully boy, thank you for your invitation to your meeting. However at this time your invitation has not been selected. Boomshanka
Looking top right you will notice my post was not edited.
You apparently skipped through Y-L’s speech, not mine.
You so far only mention sexualisation of children.
I think many other politicians and others are talking about that.
Is there something you think is left unsaid that you wish to highlight?
After all saying “sexualisation of kids is wrong” is hardly controversial is it?
Asian grooming gangs we have mentioned before.
Horrible evil gangs.
So are white English grooming gangs of course.
Are you only worried about the Asian ones? Of course not.
The gangs in Birmingham and Cornwall, comparable with the Rochdale gangs?
Nationwide coverage? Nah.
If there is a God he will know how many are hushed up.
In the meantime there are those with vivid imaginations and YouTube channels who will invent figures I am sure.
As I said, I agree with most of his points, but for reasons and examples already pointed out…what is the point in discussing them with a blinkered you.
So I need to put my trust in God then eh…
Got it.
Which particular one do you suggest, apparently there are quite a few.
I’ll look for the one wearing a red rosette and who is particularly pc and woke.
Oh so you picked up on a turn of phrase to make a point…
Ok .
Frangers mate (another ) newsflash…
Shhh he dont exist.
Btw I will mention to the girl my daughter knows, the young single mother of the little kid who was attemoted to be abducted by 2 immigrants (followed afterwards to their all inclusive hotel…)
‘Hey pet, It didnt really happen, it was your vivid imagination’
I’ll get back to you with her reply.
And following the Police saying no further action to be taken against Rayner, she gets the full apology, and apologies for wasting police time from the Tories that we all expected.
The lack of even a grudging apology is hardly a shock, but trying to somehow say she could have avoided it all by…doing what? Trying to blame her by not being hit by the muck being thrown about?
And of course the Tory nonsense “they are all the same” is again shown as a failed tactic.
Unable to show they are not corrupt they try to sling mud elsewhere. Not much of it is sticking.
I’m getting the strong urge to just tell you to just go and ■■■■ off but I will resist it, given that you feel you just HAVE to win an argument in a petty sort of way.
What?
Where did I say that?
A guy stepped in and stopped it, he tracked them to their hotel,.and it was reported, either by him her or both.
Why are you implying I am making this up or something, I could not gaf if YOU believe me or not, and why are you so concerned about the reporting aspect, but continue to rubbish any negative thing that is said about these people?
Really?
I meant it was hushed up by possibly authoriative bodies and certainly the media.
Why would a parent of an abducted kid or a ra9e victim hush it up.
You are often defending them on here.and trying to justify and excuse their presence in some way or another…or am I also making that up.
I dont know if you are winding me up here or toying with me, but it is getting to the stage where it is a pointless excercise indulging you in conversation.
Unfortunately, alleged attempted abductions etc are not front page news normally.
The aforementioned B’ham case only made the local papers after all.
I can’t see the “authorities” hushing things up in normal circumstances.
Not to say everyone, every time, is prefect, but if you are suggesting some sort of organised coverup, that seems like conspiracy to me.
) what I wanted you and everybody else to listen to.
.
he dont exist.